We have books from the same author, or 100% surely the same illustrator at home away from home. I can't remember if i have read them, and if they were useful. You must understand we have about maybe 500 to 600 books about warfare, from the 1930's up until today.

Despite that fact we never train based on books available to the public, because the theories behind them are rarely backed up by statistics. As a general statistic I want to go home after 99% of my missions. The 1% rule is the willingness to die when one has to to save many.

While waiting i prefer to read about footbaal/soccer or science.

No unit i know trains by more then one book, and that one is usually a detailed history of previous misssions, and why the succeeded or failed.

That said, do you think there's a huge void in terms of statistics and the scientific method in CQB? I know some American universities (mainly criminology departments) that have done studies on entries, reaction times, accuracy whilst under pressure, etcetera. But there does not seem to be a whole lot of it out there.

CQB-TEAM Education and Motivation.

"Pragmatism over theory."
"Anyone with a weapon is just as deadly as the next person."
"Unopposed CQB is always a success, if you wanted you could moonwalk into the room holding a Pepsi."

Its my dayjob, drive fast in armored german cars and entering buildings without concent or warning. Theory in books can/must be trained in controlled situations, these things give you the edge over your opponent.

In real life your opposition missed the briefing, and doesn't always cooperate. If anyone on my team is surprised or knows more then me they can change tactic at every time, and because of training we understand what he(we have no she's) is doing, and switch to his tactic.

We spot a threat in our teams behavior before its called on coms. Its this collective shared experience, combined with discipline that make a cqb unit effective. Theory and training are just as important as a detailed plan. Its about being adaptive to the actual threat, not the planned threat.

And as I mentioned before, limited entry with 1/4 MOA degree slices is also human nature when under fire, dynamic entry of any "hole" in a wall while under fire is just not going to happen in the field.